Rename heat_rate_mmbtu_mwh -> heat_rate_mmbtu_mwh_by_unit

[bendnorman]

PR Overview

This PR rename the heat_rate_mmbtu_mwh -> heat_rate_mmbtu_mwh_by_unit so it's clear heat rate is a unit level attribute. We decided to make this change because assets downstream of _out_eia__{freq}_heat_rate_by_unit broadcast heat_rate_mmbtu_mwh across generators.

@katie-lamb I replaced all instances of heat_rate_mmbtu_mwh with heat_rate_mmbtu_mwh_by_unit. Are there parts of the code where it doesn't make sense to use heat_rate_mmbtu_mwh_by_unit? I think it might be a little duplicative to have a heat_rate_mmbtu_mwh_by_unit column in the heat_rate_mmbtu_mwh_by_unit asset but I thought it would be nice for the column name to be consistent / traceable throughout all of the assets.

PR Checklist

• Merge the most recent version of the branch you are merging into (probably dev).
• All CI checks are passing. Run tests locally to debug failures
• Make sure you've included good docstrings.
• For major data coverage & analysis changes, run data validation tests
• Include unit tests for new functions and classes.
• Defensive data quality/sanity checks in analyses & data processing functions.
• Update the release notes and reference reference the PR and related issues.
• Do your own explanatory review of the PR to help the reviewer understand what's going on and identify issues preemptively.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified lines are covered by tests ✅

Comparison is base (799282a) 88.5% compared to head (5e5a441) 88.5%.

Additional details and impacted files

@@                   Coverage Diff                    @@
##           rename-ferc1-core-assets   #2917   +/-   ##
========================================================
  Coverage                      88.5%   88.5%           
========================================================
  Files                            90      90           
  Lines                         10821   10821           
========================================================
  Hits                           9582    9582           
  Misses                         1239    1239           

Files	Coverage Δ
src/pudl/analysis/ferc1_eia.py	98.0% <ø> (ø)
src/pudl/analysis/ferc1_eia_train.py	52.9% <ø> (ø)
src/pudl/analysis/mcoe.py	97.4% <ø> (ø)
src/pudl/analysis/plant_parts_eia.py	96.5% <ø> (ø)
src/pudl/metadata/fields.py	100.0% <ø> (ø)
src/pudl/metadata/resources/eia.py	100.0% <ø> (ø)
src/pudl/metadata/resources/mcoe.py	100.0% <ø> (ø)
src/pudl/validate.py	49.4% <ø> (ø)

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[zaneselvans]

Maybe it's too late to catch this, but our convention is to have the physical units be the last component of column names.

Having _by_unit at the end also kind of clashes with the occasional _per_unit that we've used when a column has mixed units (e.g. fuel costs which can be per ton, per mcf, per gallon, per barrel) with _unit standing in for the ambiguous physical unit, whereas here the unit is a generation unit.

The physical units here are really [MMBtu / MWh] and in almost all composite unit column names we've made the per explicit as in avg_customers_per_month, min_fuel_mmbtu_per_unit, fuel_cost_per_mmbtu, fuel_cost_per_mwh etc. which I think is clearer. In the context of all those other names containing _per_ it would be easy for someone to interpret _mmbtu_mwh as units of [MMBtu * MWh]

So it seems like this column should end with _mmbtu_per_mwh, maybe like unit_heat_rate_mmbtu_per_mwh

[bendnorman]

Ah great catch thank you @zaneselvans! I'm a total naming convention hypocrite! unit_heat_rate_mmbtu_per_mwh makes more sense, thanks for explaining. I'll update the name.

[katie-lamb]

Looks good!